Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
simplesafety  
#1 Posted : 21 March 2014 12:33:02(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
simplesafety

We all hear stories of misguided companies CoSHH assessing tipex and risk assessing stairs, but where do you draw the line with accident reports? I don’t mean recording in the accident book, but a basic accident investigation? How minor / major will an accident have to be before you investigate it on paper? Loss time? Small cut ? How and where do you draw the line on investigating or not investigation due to triviality? Is it your own opinion or do you have a written black / white policy? Do you only investigate RIDDOR’s as legally required? It would be interesting to hear your thoughts ?
Jane Blunt  
#2 Posted : 21 March 2014 12:39:27(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Jane Blunt

I do it in relation to the reasonably likely outcome. For instance I heard of one 'incident' where no injury whatever was caused. However, the person was lucky to be alive, because what he did was extremely dangerous. This was the 'incident' that I spent the most time on, with measures including improving the system of work, the hardware, the training, the perceptions etc.
A Kurdziel  
#3 Posted : 21 March 2014 13:13:49(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

As Jane said it all depends.. You have to look at the seriousness so the accident/incident and its potential for being a more serious incident. You also have to look at what you can do about it. Some of our staff do a fair bit of driving and get caught up in the occasional RTA. Although potentially this could be serious in most cases there is very little we can do about apart from banning our people from driving( which we can’t do); we don’t investigate most RTA to any sort of depth unless there is something that is obviously within our control eg evidence of a poorly maintained vehicle, or someone had been driving for too many hours etc. as a cause of the accident.
martin1  
#4 Posted : 21 March 2014 15:04:07(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
martin1

We investigate all near miss incidents and injury incidents regardless of level of injury. We try and take into account "potential" when investigating. Higher potential incidents are expected to generate more detailed reports. If you only investigate RIDDORs you won't have a clue to the true potential for injury in your place of work.
alistair  
#5 Posted : 21 March 2014 15:36:07(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
alistair

The following is taken from our policy and find it quite a useful guide. Do all incidents have to be investigated? Yes. However, not all events need to be investigated to the same extent. A simple risk-based approach should be used to identify where most benefits can be gained from an investigation. The greatest time and effort should be concentrated on events that caused, or had the potential to cause serious injury or ill-health. To assist you in deciding how much time and effort to afford an investigation, consideration should be given to the following: • What was the worst that could have happened? • What prevented the worst from happening? • What was the worst injury or damage that could have resulted (the severity potential)? • How often could such an event occur (the recurrence potential)? • How many people could the event have affected (the population potential)? A
johnmc  
#6 Posted : 21 March 2014 19:06:25(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
johnmc

I would concur with Alistair if someone gets dust in their eye the investigation will consist of simple questions like how did it happen and was suitable eye protection available and used. For serious outcomes a more robust approach will be taken and actioned accordingly.
stuie  
#7 Posted : 21 March 2014 21:51:18(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stuie

Full 8D/Ishikawa and 5 whys for all accidents - by nature some are less complex than others. Stu
Juan Carlos Arias  
#8 Posted : 22 March 2014 09:18:32(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Juan Carlos Arias

I agree with previous posts. In my opinion all incidents should be investigated as more often than not there's more than meets the eye. The level of investigation will depend on the injuries sustained or the potential to cause harm. With regards to only investigating RIDDORS, often we don't know it until the IP has been away from work for over 7 days which would mean the investigation would be conducted too late to be effective.
BernieGale123  
#9 Posted : 24 March 2014 15:44:47(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
BernieGale123

All Accident reports should at least be read!! One company I came across in the days of accident books had just left the accident book on the shop floor to be filled in. When they were faced with a claim after three years they were quite upset to red the single sentence fell over and broke leg. Apparently the personnel department had assumed the accident which occurred on a Friday evening had happened at home. The employee left while still in recovery. Believe me it still happens with accident report forms which get left in books or none knows where they should be sent. Managers who see accident investigation as outside their area of responsibility. But all points in posts above are true you need to set your criteria for detailed investigation based on your own systems.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.